Superintendent Deasy

Jaime Aquino‘s surprise announcement Friday that he’ll resign from Superintendent John Deasy‘s staff at the end of the year has sent shockwaves throughout LA Unified. Tomorrow, the district school board will take up the matter in closed session.

It’s unclear what they’ll discus – but his impending departure has exposed the district and its fractured board to a number of sudden and burning questions, not least of which may be:

Is Deasy Next?

On election night in March, just as it was becoming clear that Steve Zimmer was going to hold off a tough challenge by Kate Anderson, I got an email from a semi-prominent school reformer, offering three bold pronoucements: there would be a new board president (there is), there would be a new makeup of the board (there is) and Deasy would be on his way out. My correspondent told me: “Enough board interference makes his job really unfun and he leaves for greener pastures.”

They were unusual predictions, coming as they did months before Monica Ratliff pulled off a shock upset against Antonio Sanchez. Deasy’s staff is certainly frustrated by the new makeup of the board, as evidenced by Aquino’s departure. When asked last Friday if he was thinking about resigning, Deasy declined to comment – an ominous response coming from the man who told LAUSD administrators little more than a month ago, “I and this administration are not going anywhere.”

And that’s just the first question awaiting resolution:

Who will replace Aquino?

Will it be another headstrong reformer? Or will it be someone a bit more palatable to the new ideological makeup of the school board? Will Deasy be given autonomy in the search for Aquino’s successor? Will the board insist on having input? Will there even be a replacement?

How will Vladovic respond?

The new board majority seems to have an affinity for process. They like asking questions. They like discussion. They like committees. So far, Board President Richard Vladovic has let the debate flow, showing little interest in speeding things up – in stark contrast to his predecessor, Monica Garcia. But with the slow pace of board action being partially blamed for Aquino’s departure, will Vladovic endeavor to speed things up, lest more senior staff resign?

Did Aquino have other reasons to quit?

“My heart is completely broken,” Aquino told the LA Daily News. “But the current climate doesn’t allow me to lead an agenda that is in the best interest of kids.”

There’s something a bit vague about that explanation. Was he frustrated by the slow pace of deliberation? By the workload created by incessant questions from various board members? Or by the new idealogical makeup of the board, whose budget priorities differ greatly from those of Deasy?

Some have suggested that Aquino might have other reasons for quitting – namely, for questions raised by the tablet computer procurement process, which led the district to enter into a deal with Apple for iPads with Pearson software for every student and teacher in LAUSD – at more than $600 a pop. Aquino has been criticized for his role in the process because he used to work for America’s Choice, which is owned by Pearson.

“There’s no question the procurement issues related to the iPads and the Pearson software is a significant part of this,” said former board member David Tokofsky.

Will the Common Core Rollout Get Even Bumpier?

Will Board members see Aquino as something of a “lame duck,” and take his recommendations less seriously than before? Will further elements of the district’s technology plan, as well as the transition to the Common Core curriculum, be called into question?

It could well turn out that Aquino’s resignation is only the first surprise.

Previous posts: Aquino’s Resignation Explanation; Deasy Deputy Jaime Aquino Resigns (Updated);  Aquino Sees Deeper Thinking but Falling Scores with Common Core; Senior District Employee Gives to Garcia

Meant to shine a light on the Mayor’s race, the map is also pretty useful in trying to figure out what happened in the District 6 School Board race.

In essence, the map seems to indicate that precinct-level turnout may have played a larger role than previously understood.

We walked precincts with Antonio Sanchez on the Saturday before the election, starting in the City of San Fernando (where there was no Mayor’s race, and therefore had roughly 4 percent turnout), but later crossed over to the City of Los Angeles. About 15 percent of voters in that precinct cast ballots (not including outstanding ballots yet to be counted).

Monica Ratliff went walking in the Sunland-Tujunga area, close to where she lives. Voter turnout in that precinct was 28 percent. Voters in the area have a long history of being politically engaged — at least compared to the rest of the city.

“We’re very politically active,” said Mark Seigel, President of the Sunland-Tujunga Neighborhood Council. “We have many people that come out for issues for our community.”

The discrepancy in voter turnout was born out of a confluence of events including a Mayor’s race that did not include a candidate that excited the Latino base like outgoing Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, as well as overall low turnout rates that seemed to have affected Latino voters more than it effected white voters.

Although the majority of District 6 voters are Latino, they generally vote in smaller numbers than white voters. In 2009, Nury Martinez defeated her opponent, Louis Pugliese by just 500 or so votes.

Previous posts: Cheers — and Confusion; How Ratliff Won (& Reformers Lost); Ratliff Scores School Board Upset

“From what I’ve seen, from the reports, I believe Monica’s the winner,” he told LA School Report. “I wish Monica and everybody on the School Board success.”

In a written statement, the teachers union congratulated Ratliff on her victory: “We are overjoyed that a working classroom teacher will be on the School Board.  Ms. Ratliff has seen firsthand the kind of harm that is done when a District is mismanaged.”

UTLA also trumpeted its support for its endorsed Mayoral candidate, Eric Garcetti, who handily defeated Wendy Greuel to become the next Mayor of Los Angeles.

Since LA School Report wrote about the campaign aftermath yesterday morning (see: How Ratliff Won & Reformers Lost), reactions and post-election analysis have continued to pour in, including exultation from Ratliff supporters and head-scratching from Sanchez allies.

Thus far, at least, there’s no real consensus about why Sanchez lost or — just as interesting — exactly how Ratliff won. But there are lots of theories.

One general theme emerging from Tuesday night’s municipal election was the limited effectiveness of special interest money.

Greuel had been the recipient of millions of dollars from public employee unions, which commentators are now saying hurt her campaign.

Likewise, Sanchez was the recipient of money from both deep-pocketed “school reformers” and service workers — and if it didn’t hurt, it certainly didn’t help enough to bring home a win.

“Right now we’re in this moment where big money just makes people skeptical,” said consultant Glenn Gritzner, who often works for charter schools and other education-related clients.

“Overcoming financial odds of this size … suggests a big difference in the allure of the candidates and the ability to make big money unattractive,” said Charles Kerchner, labor and education politics professor at Claremont Graduate University in the LA Times.

USC political science Professor Dan Schnur argued that voters were more concerned with the Mayor’s race, and most of them probably decided who to vote for while they were already at the polls.

“These candidates were largely overshadowed by the citywide races,” Schnur told LA School Report. “Most voters probably made the decision based on ballot designation.”

The ballot designation label that appeared below Ratliff’s name was “fifth grade teacher.”

But many of those who watched the race were also saying that the reform community picked the wrong candidate to promote.

Some called for a candidate like Iris Zuniga with a connection to public education in Los Angeles.

“Antonio wasn’t the right candidate up there,” said one prominent reform-aligned official. “I was very clear with people.”

The final choice was, reportedly, made by outgoing Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, for whom Sanchez worked as an aide for six years. Villaraigosa was also the chief fundraiser for the Coalition.

When asked to comment on the School Board election results, Villaraigosa spokesman Vicki Curry emailed: “The Mayor doesn’t have a separate statement from the Coalition.”

“Sometimes, getting all of the support is worse than getting some of the support,” said Raphael Sonenshein, the executive director of the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs at Cal State Los Angeles, in the LA Daily News.

For his part, Sanchez didn’t have any clear answer about why he’d lost.  “I’m disappointed. I really thought that we built a really good team, a really good coalition,” he told LA School Report. To think back on the last seven months, I dedicated night and day to this campaign. I’m surprised.”

Theories about how and why Ratliff won were somewhat less specific.

Refrigerator magnets, a core team of volunteers, and a focus on Sunland, Tujunga, and other promising precincts was a big part of her success, according to the LA Times.

“Even Ratliff’s supporters sounded pretty stunned,” according to LA Times editorial page writer Karin Kline.

After an election-night gathering held in her one-bedroom Sunland apartment, Ratliff was in her classroom bright and early yesterday morning, according to the Daily News, having received a congratulatory call from LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy.

Previous posts: How Ratliff Won (& Reformers Lost); Final Unofficial Tally; Ratliff Scores School Board Upset; Ratliff Holds Narrow Lead; Voter Turnout Will Determine Outcome

Sanchez has now conceded the race.* Ratliff couldn’t be reached for comment. The Daily News’ Barbara Jones reported earlier this morning that Ratliff was at San Pedro Elementary teaching, as she has been throughout the campaign.

Turnout in the race was roughly 16 percent, although according to the City Clerk, there are still more than 82,000 votes left to be counted citywide. It is unknown how many of those uncounted ballots are from District 6.

Observers, to say the least, are shocked. Recriminations within the so-called “school reform” community have already begun, with one pro-reform insider calling the result “an utter disaster.”

The small clique of UTLA activists that helped Ratliff win, on the other hand, are ecstatic.

“Am I surprised? Yes,” said Brent Smiley, vice chair for UTLA’s political action committee. “I’m truly floored. I think, ultimately, [voters] saw [Sanchez] as a politician. And they viewed [Ratliff] as what she was – a classroom teacher.”

Those involved in the race are crediting Ratliff’s poise as a candidate, her ballot designation as a classroom teacher, and a small but devoted group of volunteers; they blame Sanchez’s loss on his lack of familiarity with education issues, the ineffectiveness of the campaigns on his behalf, and low voter turnout.

At least one observer credited UTLA’s endorsement of both Ratliff and Sanchez, which conventional wisdom credited as a major advantage for Sanchez, as having had the completely unintended effect of protecting Ratliff.

While Ratliff’s campaign was greatly outspent, local know-how may have played a part in her victory.

Smiley (who does not speak for UTLA) was part of a small group of teacher-activists who worked tirelessly on the Ratliff campaign, posting on list-serves and on Facebook and going door-to-door, targeting likely voters.

“Because there are so many of us who have done these campaigns before, we know how to do this,” he said. “We know which voters to focus on.”

Ratliff won the early mail-in vote by roughly four percentage points, which was not much of a surprise given the past performance of other UTLA-supported candidates like Steve Zimmer.

Much more surprisingly, Ratliff came close to breaking even on ballots cast on election day, marking a stunning loss for the field organizations of both the Coalition for School Reform and SEIU Local 99, which were both supporting Sanchez.

“Antonio Sanchez’ understanding of the needs of our communities made him a strong voice for our schools,” said SEIU Local 99 head Courtni Pugh in a statement. “While we are disappointed that he was not elected to the LAUSD School Board, we look forward to working with Monica Ratliff.”

The Coalition and the SEIU spent over $2 million to elect Sanchez. Ratliff, meanwhile, spent roughly $50,000 and had no special interest support.

The defeat may prove to have some long-term benefits for LA’s school reform movement.

“It’s stunning, but in way, it’s good,” said the pro-reform insider we spoke with. “It shows you can’t buy an election.”

Many will, no doubt, blame the candidate himself.

“Sanchez was definitely a bad candidate,” said the reform insider.  “I don’t think he had any affinity for education. This was just a stepping stone for him.”

Others may blame the recruitment and selection of the candidate by the Villaraigosa team.

The Coalition for School Reform appeared confident in the days before the election. Multiple sources said they had internal polls showing Sanchez up by as many as 20 percentage points.

And the independent expenditure campaign appeared to be saving up hundreds of thousands of dollars for the next elections, in 2015, rather than spending down as they might have done if they’d expected a close race.

Now the reform movement in LA faces the reality of having spent roughly over $4 million (once all the bills are paid) only to lose two out of three 2013 School Board races.

Making matters worst, its driving force, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, is out of a job and his replacement — Eric Garcetti — is by many accounts unlikely to be as devoted to the reform approach to education as his predecessor.

One of the biggest oddities of the race was the teachers union’s dual endorsement of both Ratliff and Sanchez, which tied UTLA’s hands when it came to supporting Ratliff.

That strategy, harshly criticized by pro-Ratliff activists like Diane Ravitch, now looks like it may have worked out.

Even though Smiley supported Ratliff, he was also an architect of the dual endorsement strategy, saying that both candidates were perfectly acceptable, and arguing that it would be better to have teachers decide who to vote for themselves.

If this meant that UTLA couldn’t spend any money on Ratliff, it also meant that the Coalition couldn’t attack Ratliff for being beholden to the union, of which she was a chapter chair and House of Representatives member.

“We took away from the Coaltion the one thing they desperately needed — a negative message,” said Smiley. “We didn’t let them hit the teachers union. They had absolutely nothing negative to say.”

Indeed, there was no negative campaigning whatsoever in the runoff — neither by Sanchez, the Coalition, or the underdog Ratliff.

Not that Smiley planned it that way: “I’m not gonna lie to you and say that was the plan. It wasn’t.”

The Coalition for School Reform congratulated Ratliff on her victory.

“Although thousands of votes remain uncounted, it appears that Monica Ratliff has won the District 6 runoff for Los Angeles School Board.  The Coalition for School Reform congratulates member-elect Ratliff and looks forward to working with her.”

For most of the morning, the Sanchez campaign was not prepared to give up.

“The turnout was 16.76%, and in extremely low, I would say historically low-turnout elections, anything can happen,” said Sanchez spokesman Mike Shimpock in an email statement. “Unfortunately, anything did happen and Antonio finds himself behind. But there still are many outstanding ballots to be counted, and anything could happen again, only in our favor. I think we need to wait and see what the clerk says their timeline for completing the canvass is before we make any decisions.”

School Board candidates Antonio Sanchez (left) and Monica Ratliff (right)

If you haven’t already read Hillel Aron’s profiles of the District 6 candidates Monica Ratliff and Antonio Sanchez on the campaign trail this past weekend, be sure and do so here and here.

Did you know, however, that one of the two candidates was in a 2012 Nazi revenge film (straight to DVD) and the other was an antiwar protester whose image was featured by the LA Times?

Click below for the images and some of the details.

First, there’s a young Antonio Sanchez, protesting against the war in Iraq in 2003 and captured by the LA TImes:

School Board candidate Antonio Sanchez, in red Bob Marley t-shirt, circa 2003 (via LA Times)

Next, there’s Monica Ratliff, playing Maria the maid in a Lionsgate DVD feature called “Battle Force:”

School Board candidate Monica Ratliff (right) as Maria in “Battle Force” (Lionsgate 2012)

Reporting by Amy Silverstein.

Sanchez’s Latino surname and fluency in Spanish is also a built-in advantage (though Ratliff’s mother is from Mexico).

“You’re looking at a very Latino district,” said Mike Shimpock, Sanchez’s campaign consultant. “And this is a district where ethnic identity voting still makes a difference on election day.”

Internal polls are said to show a decisive advantage for Sanchez, but voter turnout could play a huge role.

“If the turnout is above 15 percent, Sanchez wins running away,” said Brent Smiley, a teacher and vice chair of UTLA’s political action committee. “If it’s below 15 percent, then things get interesting.”

The Ratliff campaign has been hampered by the fact that the candidate has kept her day job, teaching at San Pedro Elementary, leaving her fairly little time to raise money and talk to voters.

“For better or worse, School Board districts are huge, and it’s almost impossible to win if you have no opportunity to campaign in front of voters,” said Shimpock.

He’s predicting a 10 point victory for his client — roughly the same margin of victory that Sanchez held over Ratliff in the primary.

A source close to the Coalition for School Reform’s campaign on behalf of Sanchez said a recent internal poll had Sanchez over the 50 percent threshold, but declined to say what the margin was.

The Coalition, which has spent $3.8 million on three 2013 School Board races, has run a decidedly low-key campaign in the primary, running no TV ads, sending out only positive mailers, and spending less money than it did during the primary.

“The plan was always to have money in the hopper for the next race, in case the next mayor doesn’t raise money,” said one pro-school reform insider.

Even so, the Coalition and SEIU Local 99 have spent over $2 million on behalf of Sanchez. Ratliff, by comparison, had spent $55,000 as of May 14, much of it on a handful of slate mailers and direct mail — as well as some rulers identifying her as “Mònica” Ratliff — in an attempt to remind voters that she’s half Latina.

Though she has made remarks about wanting to get rid of “big money” from the School Board race, Ratliff has not gone on the attack against her opponent.

District 6 turnout in the primary was 17.6 percent, about 3.5 percentage points lower than city-wide turnout, which is expected by many to rise by a few points, perhaps to about 25 percent, in the runoff.

“Historically, there’s a five to eight percent boost in turnout [from the primary to the runoff],” said Shimpock. “I think it’s gonna be even less this time. And this district would behave similarly.”

Smiley, who’s volunteering for Ratliff’s campaign, issued a bold prediction:

“I think [turnout’s] gonna be less than 15 [percent]. I’ve been knocking on doors. The most common response is, ‘Sanchez who?’ and ‘Ratliff who?’ Neither side has reached enough voters.”

The Coalition source told us that based on early returns, the number of absentee ballots was expected to be roughly the same as it was in the primary.

One wild card is the City Council primary, which includes sitting School Board member Nury Martinez. If voters are excited about that race, it could push turnout up.

But even if turnout does drop tomorrow, Sanchez still remains the slight favorite, if for no other reason than he’ll have a field campaign run by the SEIU Local 99, the union which represents classified workers (and went undefeated in the primary).

“[Steve] Zimmer wouldn’t have won without the SEIU on his side,” said one former consultant aligned with UTLA. “Monica [Ratliff]’s got none of that.”

Previous posts: Walking San Fernando with Antonio Sanchez; Door-to-Door in Sunland with Monica Ratliff; East Valley Power Politics Shaped District 6 Runoff; Reform Coalition Focuses Massive War Chest on Mailers

District 6 candidate Antonion Sanchez walking on Saturday.

Antonio Sanchez always introduces himself to voters the same way, telling them within ten seconds that he grew up in Pacoima, went to San Fernando High School, and graduated form Cal State Northridge before going on to UCLA.

And so when he canvases precincts in San Fernando on Saturday, he knows most of the streets. He even knows some of the voters — both from growing up in the area and from working on a number of political campaigns, from as far back as Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s election in 2005 and Cindy Montanez’s failed State Senate run in 2006.

Although he’s a first-time candidate, the 31-year-old Sanchez also enjoys a panoply of political connections to labor groups, State legislators and East Valley community groups. As a result, nearly $2 million has been spent on Sanchez’s behalf by outside groups, making him the clear favorite in the race.

Spending a couple of hours this past Saturday walking a precinct with Sanchez and his friend, Pete Brown, it’s clear that the connections are an advantage about which Sanchez is unapologetic — but also something he has to answer for.

Sanchez and his friend Pete Brown

An ally who worked with Sanchez on previous campaigns, Brown is  just one of a number of volunteers walking precincts that day — many of whom are young politically active Latinos.

Many of the residents instantly recognize Sanchez when he knocks on their doors.

“You look older in the picture!” says one woman in Spanish, laughing. Sanchez laughs and replies in Spanish.

Like many others in the East Valley, she’s gotten scores of glossy mailers with his face on them — some sent by his own campaign but more often than not by either SEIU Local 99, which represents LAUSD classified employees, or the Coalition for School Reform, a group of wealthy donors that includes New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and developer philanthropist Eli Broad.

Some voters are wary of this kind of backing.

“I’m gonna vote for you ’cause I know you went to San Fernando High School,” says a voter. “The only thing that’s suspicious is, where are you getting all this money from? I’m getting all these flyers, all these people coming to the door.”

Sanchez calmly explains to her that many of these are paid for by outside expenditure groups whose campaign is independent from his.

“It’s a lot,” says the woman, clearly sick of her mailbox getting stuffed with campaign literature.

“There has been a lot of money,” admits Sanchez, who then seeks to reassure her: “I’m gonna be fair, I’m going to have an open door policy.”

The northeast boundaries of the country’s second-largest school district extend all the way to the San Gabriel Mountains. San Fernando — its own city, independent from Los Angeles — sits in the shadow of the massive mountain range.

Unlike the City of Los Angeles, which is also choosing a new Mayor on Tuesday, there isn’t much else on the ballot in San Fernando — just a Community College race and Sanchez’s runoff against Monica Ratliff.

Some precincts here had a voter turnout of around 4 percent in the March primary. But it’s still fertile ground for Sanchez, because of its high concentration of Latino voters, and because off Sanchez’s roots in the area — although he only sort of grew up in Pacoima.

His parents grew up on the same block in Michoacan, Mexico. His dad was one of 15 children, his mom was one of 12; Sanchez says he has hundreds of cousins in Mexico. His parents moved to Chicago, where Sanchez was born. The family moved back to Mexico, and then to North Hollywood (where Sanchez lives now). When Sanchez was about 10, his dad, a bus driver for the MTA, bought a house in Pacoima.

“It’s what I remember,” he said. “I went to Pacoima Middle School. And I spent every summer in Mexico.” He credits his fluent Spanish to those summers.

Much has been made of Sanchez’s political connections. But Sanchez also has a history of political activism that started when he went to CSUN.

“I used to protest the war, and tuition hikes,” he says. “My dad made me cut my hair when I graduated.”

Indeed, Sanchez isn’t ashamed or embarrassed by his many political connections — like his friends up in Sacramento, or the fact that he Councilman Jose Huizar’s appointee to the Los Angeles redistricting commission, which fell under heavy criticism for it back-room deals and cynical gerrymandering to reward and punish various council members.

“I don’t think my campaign should be considered less legitimate because I’ve been involved,” he says. “I think it’s a good thing. I walk into neighborhood council meetings and I know half the people there.”

Asked if he’s thought about running for higher office after serving as School Board member, he replied, “I have no idea. I don’t think it would be wise to plan anything.”

Would he promise to serve out his first four-year term?

“Oh come on! Of course!” he says. “After Tuesday, it’s the next four years, making sure I have a strong staff, making sure I visit one school a week.”

Just who Sanchez picks as his staff members has been the subject of much rumor and innuendo. Sanchez says he hasn’t thought much about it. But people have been bringing it up: “I’ve had people mention, ‘Hey, you should give me a call.’ From all levels.”

He says his criteria for choosing staff won’t be ideology; it’ll be work ethic.

“I’m used to working seven days a week,” he says. “They’re gonna have to get used to working 7 days a week.”

Sanchez is by all accounts a tireless worker. He says he’s spent the first five hours of every day making fundraising phone calls, has campaigned full-time for the last two months, visiting schools, talking to parents, and going to fundraisers.

Since Thursday, it’s all about making calls and going door-to-door, reminding voters to vote.

He admits: “Dude, I’m mentally drained.”

Previous posts: East Valley Power Politics Shaped District 6 Runoff; Reform Coalition Focuses Massive War Chest on Mailers; Sanchez Supports Classroom Breakfast & Teacher Dismissal Initiatives; Why the Coalition’s Going All Out to Elect Sanchez

Candidate Ratliff walking in Sunland on Saturday.

Going door-to-door in the Sunland section of the East Valley one evening this past weekend, District 6 School Board candidate Monica Ratliff‘s pitch to voters goes something like this:

“Hi, my name is Monica Ratliff. I’m a teacher, and I’m running for the Board of Education. Do you have any questions or concerns about the school district?”

Most voters are startled by this; it’s unusual for a politician to ask voters for advice three days before the May 21 election.

But then, Ratliff is no politician.

That’s been both a strength and a weakness in the campaign. When speaking, Ratliff comes off as an authentic person with real opinions often based on 12 years of teaching in a classroom.

But her lack of political savvy has also caused her some grief — most notably in her shifting positions on the leadership of LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy.

On Saturday, Ratliff seems more interested in hearing from voters about what’s on their minds rather than telling them her own views.

Questioned by the candidate at their homes, voters’ first reaction is usually one of reticence. Then, perhaps they think of something.

“I know something — put the food back!” says a woman watering her lawn. “A lot of my daughter and her friends won’t eat the food… You know, the healthy stuff. The Obama stuff.” (LAUSD has recently changed its menu to offer healthier options).

“I’ve tasted some of the stuff,” says the District 6 School Board candidate, sympathetically. “Now, it would be nice to make it more…” She pauses, and says: “Palatable.”

Asked later about new, healthier school food options, Ratliff says that she’s not in favor of the district going back to the old menu.

She also supports Breakfast in the Classroom, the nutrition program that’s been pilloried by the teachers union in recent months (and was recently re-approved by the School Board over UTLA protests).

In fact, as a 5th grade teacher at San Pedro Elementary, a high-performing school in one of the cities poorest areas, her students actually participate in the program.

“I support breakfast for hungry children,” says Ratliff, almost implying that to do otherwise would be idiotic. “But I think we should tweak it in a number of areas.” For example: “We give the students a lot of muffins. I think it would be great it had more protein. The kids love omelette day.”

Ratliff’s opinions about the district come directly from her 12 years of experience as a classroom teacher. She’s seen first-hand the effects of budget cuts — she says her kids only get P.E. once a month — and suspending kids for willful defiance, a practice that some teachers view as a critical option for maintaining classroom discipline that the Board just voted to end.

“The problem is that when you suspend kids, they don’t learn,” she says.

We spent two hours on Saturday evening walking door-to-door in Sunland, one of the more affluent sections of District 6, an area dominated by horse farms and stables. The tracts are big, the houses are big, and many have big fences.

Ratliff chose the precinct because it’s close to her house but also because most of its residents voted for Ratliff during the primary.

According to her campaign manager, a screenwriter named Chuck Kanganis, her campaign has 33 volunteers making phone calls and walking precincts this Saturday.

Ratliff, with UTLA chapter chair Matthew Kogan

One of them is Matthew Kogan, a teacher and UTLA Chapter Chair at Evans Community School, who accompanies Ratliff as she goes door-to-door.

She walks up to a large fence and calls the phone number of the house, which is usually provided on lists of registered voters made available to candidates for a small fee.

“Hi, my name is Monica Ratliff,” she says over the phone. “I’m a teacher, and I’m running for Board of Education, and I’m actually standing outside your gate right now.”

For some, this might sound a bit creepy. But Ratliff delivers the line with a kind of friendly confidence that seems to put voters at ease. When she solicits their opinions, it usually leaves them impressed, perhaps even flattered.

“They’re electing me to be their representative, so it’s essential to know what they’re concerns are,” says Ratliff.

When voters aren’t home, she writes a short message on glossy campaign flyers, which have her personal email and cel phone number printed.

Many of the Sunland homeowners — especially those in the hills — say they send their children to private school.

“I wouldn’t have my kid go to public school in LA,” says one woman bluntly. “It’s sad. I wish there was a public school that I felt safe sending my kids to. But it feels like a lost cause.”

Ratliff handles voters like this (we meet three others) smoothly. She listens sympathetically and thanks them. Sometimes, she doesn’t even ask for their vote. For a political neophyte, Ratliff is surprisingly comfortable talking to voters and talking incisively about issues on the fly.

But there’s one topic that can make Ratliff squirm.

“I want you to support Mr. Deasy and the changes he’s trying to make,” says one woman Ratliff encounters, who says she already voted for Ratliff on her absentee ballot. “It’s difficult in the district and it needs to be better.”

“I’ve heard that,” says Ratliff, nervously.

Ratliff’s position on the Superintendent has shifted over the last few months. Initially, she refused to commit to keeping him. Then, in a phone interview with LA School Report, she said she would vote to fire Deasy, but that he’d be allowed to re-apply for his job, much like teachers at reconstituted schools. Her reasoning, at the time, was that no other candidates had been interviewed when Deasy was originally hired.

The move appeared to be an attempt to curry favor with the teachers union, which has endorsed both Ratliff and her opponent. The union has stayed neutral, although Ratliff has gotten the support of UTLA activists like Kogan and Brent Smiley, as well as New York University education historian Diane Ravitch, who has criticized the union’s stance.

But Ratliff’s pivot made others wary. The LA Times, which had endorsed her in the primary, called her in for a second interview, where Ratliff assured them that she would not vote to fire Deasy after all.

“It appeared that his appointment — there’d been no search process,” she says now, walking down the street, tension building in her voice. “After I said that, I spoke to a number if people about previous searches. It became clear that the search doesn’t matter… What became clear is if School Boards want to buy out [the superintendent’s contract], they’re going to do it.”

She also says “the purpose was to get this money out of the School Board race,” suggesting that since Deasy has the support of the Coalition for School Reform, an independent expenditure (IE) committee that has poured $3.8 million into the three Board races, a vote against Deasy is a vote against the Coalition.

But her logic is hard to follow. When pressed, she seems to become flustered.

“I just feel like I explained it to the LA Times, and I explained it to you,” she says, trying to put the subject to bed.

The Times editorial board appeared satisfied with her explanation, and kept their endorsement of her.

Ratliff is the decided underdog in this race. The Coalition for School Reform and the SEIU Local 99, which represents LAUSD classified workers, have spent nearly $2 million on behalf of Sanchez — for a job that pays just over $40,000 a year.

Not only that, District 6 is more than 50 percent Latino, according to Political Data.

Sanchez’s name leaves no doubt as to his ethnicity, but it’s not so clear for Ratliff. She doesn’t speak Spanish fluently*, but she is actually half Latina, with a mom from Guadalajara, Mexico, who gave birth to her in Phoenix.

The Ratliff campaign tried to capitalize on this recently by sending out rulers reading “Mònica Ratliff.”

“I heard that people were saying I was a white Republican,” she says. “I’m actually Latina. I wanted to make sure we got that message out.”

Most insiders and observers give Ratliff little chance of beating the well-funded and well-connected Sanchez. But there is a chance. Teachers and people who are close to teachers like to vote for other teachers, and they vote reliably. If voter turnout is especially low, Ratliff’s job as a teacher could make all the difference.

*This post originally stated that Ratliff does not speak Spanish. Her campaign manager, who didn’t get back to us until after the story had been first posted, says that she speaks “conversational Spanish.”

Previous posts: Board Candidate Ratliff Attends UTLA Rally*; School Board Candidate Praises Deasy’s Efforts to Limit Tenure; District 6 Candidate Commits to Support Deasy; Runoff: Union & LA Times Might Shift Endorsements

Wendy Greuel answered without hesitation: Antonio Sanchez.

Eric Garcetti said he had only met with one of the candidates, but was “due to talk to the other one shortly, so stay tuned…”

Nine days later — with only two business days left until the election — Garcetti still has not made an endorsement or met with the other candidate.

Garcetti spokesman Jeff Millman said he didn’t know which candidate Garcetti had met with: “Those are private conversations.”

Sanchez told LA School Report that he met with Garcetti several weeks ago.

A Garcetti endorsement of Sanchez or his opponent, Monica Ratliff, wouldn’t mean much to either candidate at this late stage, but if Garcetti chose Ratliff it would mark a rare concrete difference between the two Mayoral hopefuls on education.

The lack of any endorsement  decision from Garcetti may tell us just as much.

When asked if he supported School Board President Monica Garcia during a primary debate, Garcetti dodged the question, saying only that he admired what Garcia had done.

Garcia went on to endorse Garcetti’s opponent, Wendy Greuel.

Previous posts: Mayoral Candidates Lack Commitment Reformers & Teachers Want; Mayoral Candidates Divided by High School; Garcetti & Gruel Debate Education; Greuel Endorses Sanchez, Garcetti Undecided; Mayoral Debate Reveals Few School [Policy] Differences

A diagram of the East Valley clan relationships that shape City Council and LAUSD politics

As you may have read in last week’s LA Weekly about School Board member Nury Martinez’s bid for a seat on the Los Angeles City Council, there are surprisingly few women left on the Council thanks in large part to a rivalry between two male-dominated East San Fernando Valley political clans.

The rivalry between these two Latino clans doesn’t just affect the City Council, however.  It also greatly influenced Tuesday’s District 6 runoff between Antonio Sanchez and Monica Ratliff.

A look at the East Valley political factions may provide some insight about how we ended up with the Sanchez-Ratliff runoff rather than any of the other configurations that initially appeared likely — and why teachers union UTLA refrained from picking a single candidate to support in the District 6 race.  They simply didn’t want to get involved in a turf war between the Padillas and the Alarcons.

Of the candidates who initially declared their intention to run, the three heavyweights appeared to be Ernie Cardenas, Iris Zuniga and Antonio Sanchez.

But Cardenas dropped out; and then so did Zuniga, leaving Sanchez and Ratliff, a virtual unkown.

Why Cardenas and Zuniga dropped out has never been fully explained, at least not in a totally satisfying way.

Solid lines denote connections; broken lines denote former connections that have since been broken

The area, as any political consultant will tell you, is dominated by two clans, the Alarcons and the Padillas:

Alarcon Clan

The first is headed by outgoing City Councilman Richard Alarcon, and includes ex-Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez (now a lobbyist and consultant for StudentsFirst), Antonio Sanchez, State Senator Kevin Deleon, community college trustees Steve Veres and Miguel Santiago, and Cindy Montanez, an ex-Assembly member who’s running against Nury Martinez for that city council seat.

(You might remember Cindy’s cousin, Annamarie, who was recruited by UTLA to run against Monica Garcia in District 2. Needless to say, LA politics is an incestuous world.)

The Padilla Clan

The other faction includes State Senator (and former LA City Council President) Alex Padilla — who championed a teacher dismissal bill in 2012 but then dropped the issue this year — incoming City Councilman Felipe Fuentes, U.S. Congressman Tony Cardenas (who recently vacated the City Council seat that Martinez and Montanez are running for), and State Assemblyman Raul Bocanegra.

It doesn’t stop there.  Nury Martinez’ husband Jerry Guzman runs the field campaign for many pols within the clan, and who currently works for Bocanegra.

Ernie Cardenas had a connection to this clique, through his brother Tony. Zuniga also had a connection, through Nury Martinez, who wanted Zuniga to succeed her.

Both Martinez and Bocanegra endorsed Zuniga, but Padilla, Cardenas and Fuentes never did (neither have they endorsed Antonio Sanchez).

Why did the power brokers turn a cold shoulder to the two political newcomers? That’s not entirely clear, but it may have something to do with the Mayor.

Sanchez is a former aide to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who is nominally aligned with the Alarcon clan, which backs Cindy Montanez.

One explanation is that Villaraigosa simply leaned on Padilla and Fuentes to support his former aide.

But some speculate that a trade was made — Padilla and Fuentes would sit the School Board race out, and in exchange, the Mayor would endorse Nury Martinez for City Council (as he eventually did).

Another possibility is that Padilla and Fuentes simply didn’t think Zuniga or Cardenas were ready for primetime. Or, they didn’t feel up for a fight with the SEIU.

And then Monica Garcia — Villaraigosa’s most trusted School Board member — may have asked the Mayor to endorse Martinez.

Previous posts: Just How Connected Is Antonio Sanchez?; The Decline and Fall of Iris Zuniga; Sanchez Supports Classroom Breakfast & Teacher Dismissal Initiatives

Close-up of Coalition mailer for District 6 candidate Antonio Sanchez

As of May 4, the independent expenditure (IE) committee known as the Coalition for School Reform had a staggering $850,000 left in the bank, according to papers filed with the City Ethics Commission.

That dwarfs the $55,000 left in the coffers of the Antonio Sanchez campaign, whom the Coalition is supporting, as well as the $21,000 held by the Monica Ratliff campaign.

Both are seeking to win the District 6 (East Valley) School Board runoff election that’s being held May 21.

Rather than airing new ads on television or radio, or going for broke with a door-to-door field operation, Coalition spokesman Addisu Demissie said the group would spend heavily on direct mail.

“The good thing about mail is, we can talk to different people in specific ways,” Demissie told LA School Report.  “It’s more efficient that way. You know how expensive TV can be in Los Angeles.”

The Coalition’s recent mailers have all been positive — in contrast to some of the pieces sent out in the primary, some of which were negative.

Sounding fairly confident, Demissie stressed that the general election doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and that the money spent during the primary — some of which went to talking to and registering non-traditional voters — would have an effect on the runoff.

“A lot of the benefits of running a strong primary and coming in first, we’re gonna see the benefits of that next week,” he said. “It’s compound interest.”

The Coalition’s beefed-up 2013 field campaign has continued, according to Demissie, but is not expected to generate massive increases.

“What we’ve been doing in our field is talking to non-traditional voters, doing voter registration, particularly in the Latino community,” he said.  “It’s not a huge number to be honest. It’s on the margins. That’s the kind of work that field does — it gets you three percent.”

The Coalition for School Reform has been a semi-permanent organization throughout the Villaraigosa years, promoting reform-friendly School Board candidates. With the election less than one week away and no television advertisements currently on air, it’s unlikely that the Coalition will spend all of its money before May 21.

The Coalition could save some money for the next School Board elections in 2015.

Hear the candidates talk about the use of test scores to evaluate teachers, principals, and schools:

Click below for the press release.

Previous posts: Sanchez Supports Classroom Breakfast & Teacher Dismissal Initiatives; School Board Candidate Praises Deasy’s Efforts to Limit Tenure

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

5/13/13

Contact:         Dylan Rubin, 562-307-7135, drubin@skdknick.com

EDUCATORS 4 EXCELLENCE AND EDVOICE PRESENT EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEWS WITH BOTH LOS ANGELES UNIFIED SCHOOL BOARD DISTRICT SIX CANDIDATES 

~

Monica Ratliff and Antonio Sanchez Throw Support Behind Current Superintendent and Creating Quality School Options, Split on Approach to Teacher Retention and School Improvement Strategies

May 13, 2013 (Los Angeles)— School board candidates Monica Ratliff and Antonio Sanchez both expressed their support for Superintendent Deasy but split on how they would approach transforming low performing schools and retaining talented teachers and leaders at hard-to-staff schools, in an exclusive interview made available today by Educators 4 Excellence Los Angeles and EdVoice. With just one week remaining until Election Day, the run-off candidates participated in a podcast interview to lay out their visions for Los Angeles’ public schools.

“This is a critical moment for public education in Los Angeles and the winner of this run-off election will be a deciding vote when it comes to the future direction of our schools. Residents in the Valley have exciting choices—Monica, a teacher in LAUSD, and Antonio, a graduate of LAUSD, who bring very different perspectives and approaches on leadership,” said Ama Nyamekye, Executive Director of Educators 4 Excellence – Los Angeles. “We broadcasted this interview so that our members and the public could all access the candidates to better understand their choices for School Board.”

Both Ratliff and Sanchez were interviewed last week, with E4E and EdVoice ensuring both candidates weighed in on the city’s most pressing educational issues, including district leadership, evaluation, teacher recruitment and retention and public charter schools, among others. The candidates were pushed to go deeper into their specific policy positions so that the public can have a broader understanding of the approach each candidate would take on the school board.

ON SUPERINTENDENT JOHN DEASY

Antonio Sanchez was unequivocal in his support, stating, “I support the Superintendent. I believe in the work that’s he’s doing. I admire his leadership…Let me give a specific example why: I’m very excited to work with the Local Initiative Schools agreement that UTLA and Superintendent Deasy crafted that transfers the ability to turn around our schools to the local teachers, principals and parents.”

Monica Ratliff also supported the Superintendent’s work, and would keep him on the job because, “he’s done a lot of good things for this district. One of the good things he’s done is he’s definitely changed the way we hand out tenure.” She did acknowledge there are disagreements between her and Dr. Deasy, but believes “we can work together to change this district.”

ON TEACHER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION

Sanchez believes a key strategy for attracting and retaining teachers is empowering them to transform their schools and protecting them from seniority-based layoff policies that disproportionately affect disadvantaged schools. “We have to turn around our lowest performing schools, our hard to staff schools, so I would want to invite teachers through the local initiative process and craft a good strong aggressive plan to turn around our lowest performing schools,” Sanchez said. He added that to keep teachers, “We need to thank them. It’s hard work! We need to thank them, recognize them and we need to protect them so we can keep that stability and let that teacher know that we appreciate their work.”

Ratliff believes that school leadership and professional development are the most essential strategies for attracting and keeping effective teachers. She notes that we must “make sure that our professional development meets the needs of our teachers.” In terms of how we do that, she would like to see the district and schools, “do more in terms of mentorship. I think that we also need to ultimately look at just bringing in highly effective teachers. Instead of always having some of the newest teachers go to some of these hardest to staff schools, we bring in some of our most effective teachers.”

ON SCHOOL CHOICE

Both Sanchez and Ratliff were strongly supportive of giving parents more choice through pilot and charter schools, with Ratliff stating “I absolutely, positively believe the district should push to establish more high performing schools, period…I think we already know what works at many schools and we need to apply that everywhere. What we’ve seen works is a fair amount of flexibility and autonomy.” 

Sanchez agreed in his interview, adding, “One of my priorities is to make sure we have quality options. I don’t care what you call it—pilot, charter, or magnet. As I speak to parents, they don’t care either. They want to make sure they have a quality school.”

ON SCHOOL TRANSFORMATION

Sanchez calls for more school autonomy—beginning with a strong and inclusive turnaround plan generated by teachers, principals and parents—with clear accountability for results. “At the end of the day, when we have tried all options, I can’t let a child continue to attend a low performing schools,” explained Sanchez. “If we can’t do anything to turn around that failing school, we have to pursue federal restructuring efforts.”

Ratliff calls for more professional development for leaders and teachers at chronically low performing schools, less emphasis on testing and more support for early childhood education and parent education.  “At a low performing school, we would want to take teachers to visit other masters performing their craft…I also think we need to take a look at some of the testing [periodic assessments] being mandated by the district.” Ratliff also notes that parent education and involvement as well as early childhood education are key. “If you give children the knowledge and tools they need before they start school officially, I think it makes a huge difference.”

The public can listen to the full podcast interviews with Monica Ratliff and Antonio Sanchez here.

To find your polling place for the Mayoral and School Board runoff election, please visit: http://www.lavote.net/LOCATOR/.

###

For far too long, education policy has been created without a critical voice at the table – the voice of classroom teachers.

Educators 4 Excellence (E4E), a teacher-led organization, is changing this dynamic by placing the voices of teachers at the forefront of the conversations that shape our classrooms and careers. Our quickly growing movement of over 2,000 California educators is united by the E4E Declaration of Teachers’ Principles and Beliefs. Through E4E, teachers can learn about education policy and research, network at our events with like-minded colleagues and policy makers, and take action by advocating for teacher-created policy recommendations that lift student achievement and the teaching profession.

For more information, please visit www.educators4excellence.org.

Monica Ratliff still teaches every day at San Pedro Elementary, so her public exposure is limited to weekends and evening events. Antonio Sanchez, meanwhile, is concentrating on talking to voters and fundraising.

“Sometimes when you get to the runoff it’s very workmanlike,” said Sanchez’s political consultant, Mike Shimpock. “This one is very much about voter consolidation. The IE [committee] is going to be doing a lot of mail.”

Sanchez has, meanwhile, indicated his position on two contentious issues — and either he or Ratliff will likely be announced as Mayoral candidate Eric Garcetti’s pick later this week.

Sanchez has come out in favor of Breakfast in the Classroom, the controversial program that gives low-income kids free breakfast in some LAUSD classrooms.

“I’m supportive of feeding hungry kids,” Sanchez told LA School Report. “They can’t concentrate or learn in the classroom if they’re hungry or suffering from malnutrition. I would not be supportive of ending the program.”

Sanchez also came out in support of State Assemblymember Joan Buchanan’s bill, AB 375, which is intended to streamline the teacher dismissal process. Some have called the bill, which is supported by the California Teachers Associatio, an overly-watered down compromise.

“It’s a step in the right direction,” said Sanchez. “I think the system is broken and it needs reform. So it’s great that someone’s working on making the system more efficient.”

Ratliff has declined to share her views on these topics with LA School Report (or anyone else, as far as we know).

It is likely that within a few days, Mayoral contender Eric Garcetti will have endorsed either Sanchez or Ratliff.  Sanchez has already been endorsed by Garcetti’s rival, Wendy Greuel.

On Monday, May 13, the two candidates will take part in separate interviews for an Educators 4 Excellence podcast.

It’s the closest thing to a debate that we’ll get in the runoff.

“There were plenty of debates in the primary,” said Shimpock, referring to two events. “I know Antonio’s positions haven’t changed. It’s pointless to debate her, because she just conforms to any views of the group she’s in front of.”

Previous posts: School Board Candidate Praises Deasy’s Efforts to Limit Tenure; Rumors Swirl Around Sanchez Staff Possibilities; Union Funding One of Two Endorsed Candidates;  Union Endorsements Unchanged for District 6

With so much at stake for the LAUSD Board District 6 runoff election, it was surprising that only one candidate, Monica Ratliff, attended the only scheduled public candidates’ forum sponsored by Teach Plus Los Angeles.

Where was Antonio Sanchez? In the midst of heavy school reform and transformation across our district, state, and the nation, this forum had the potential to provide those in attendance a clear picture on the candidates’ positions on issues that will ultimately have profound changes on our students, teachers, and the community of the northeast San Fernando Valley.

Instead, those in attendance had an opportunity to have a genuine discussion with Monica Ratliff, a current LAUSD elementary teacher, as she fielded questions from teachers, community members, parents, and LAUSD’s “Beaudry” officials.

As Monica laid out her vision for school reform, local autonomy, the role of the principal, the importance of professional development, and class sizes we kept thinking, what about Antonio Sanchez’s position?

At first, we thought Mr. Sanchez’s absence from this event meant we would not hear his message. However, his underlying message was loud and clear. After all, the Coalition for School Reform, led by Los Angeles Mayor Villaraigosa (with help from New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has contributed $350,000), claims that students are at the forefront of their agenda.

It begs the question, what has Antonio Sanchez done for education or for the LAUSD? He was a special assistant to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, then attended graduate school at UCLA where he gained his credibility for being a teaching assistant, but he has never actually worked for an LAUSD school. How has he become an expert or an effective decision maker on what our students need?

On the other hand, Monica, who has a decade of teaching experience and school leadership, presented a clear vision of “collaboration” amongst teachers, “creating partnerships” to keep vocational and arts programs in places of high need, and reframing the role of principals to have withstanding “connections with students in the
classroom.” She used this opportunity as a call-to-action to vocalize the shift from political hopscotch to real student-centered decision-making.

In a board district that has been historically underserved, Monica understands the challenges and has a clear vision of educational equity that reaches far beyond the confines of Board District 6 and reaches the students across the second largest school district in the nation. A generation of learners should not have to suffer because a candidate has political ambition and friends with deep pockets. In a time when we are seeing cuts across the district, affecting everything from early education to class sizes, we want someone who will be a consistent decision-maker.

We want someone who understands the needs of the district because they wake up every day to the faces of students who are impacted by a bureaucracy that has lost its connection to the families we serve. We want someone who will not only embrace innovation, autonomy, and thinking outside the box, but will help to ensure that our students will be competitive thinkers and global contributors. Monica is a teacher who has invested and dedicated the last decade to public education. She has a clear vision that will guide her decisions based on the needs of our students.

On May 21st, think of the students who continue to leave our public schools not prepared. Think of the overcrowded classrooms that plague our schools. Think about how you would want your school to be run, by a Manchurian candidate whose bidders influence the decisions, or by Monica Ratliff, a teacher and a dedicated public servant who continues to be the advocate for the students of our community. The choice is clear.

Pearl Arredondo, a sixth grade English and history teacher, attended Pepperdine University, where she received a Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Studies and Psychology and a Master of Arts in Education and Instructional Leadership.

Hector Perez-Roman is a National Board Certified teacher at Arleta High School.  He teaches tenth grade World History, sponsors the Student Traveling Club, and partners with Smithsonian Student Travel and Education First to offer engaging learning opportunities for all his students.

Previous posts:School Board Candidate Praises Deasy’s Efforts to Limit Tenure;  Sanchez Unavailable for Candidate Forum; Daily News Addresses Ratliff Union Role

Educators 4 Excellence, an organization that advocates for teachers to take a more active role in shaping education policies, plans to host a podcast interview with District 6 (East San Fernando Valley) runoff candidates Monica Ratliff and Antonio Sanchez.

E4E will interview Sanchez and Ratliff, who have both agreed to participate, on May 8. The podcast will available on E4E’s website to stream or download on May 13.

Previous posts: School Board Candidate Praises Deasy’s Efforts to Limit Tenure;  Sanchez Unavailable for Candidate Forum; Daily News Addresses Ratliff Union Role.

School Board candidate Monica Ratliff (right)

School Board candidate Monica Ratliff met with 15 or so teachers and LAUSD employees Thursday night at an event sponsored by Teach Plus.

During the hour-long discussion, the candidate for District 6 (East San Fernando Valley) did as much listening as she did talking, asking teachers about their concerns on issues such as local autonomy and teacher training.

“She was interested in what teachers had to say,” said John Lee, Executive Director for Teach Plus Los Angeles after the event. “It shows what kind of a Board Member she would be.”

She also answered questions from teachers on a number of issues, including Superintendent John Deasy, local autonomy for schools and teacher training. She refused, however, to answer any questions from LA School Report.

Ratliff, a 5th grade teacher at San Pedro Elementary, spoke passionately about improving professional development, vocational education in high school and lowering class size. She was also full of praise for Superintendent Deasy.

“He’s done some really good things for the district,” she said, citing the fact that he’s made it harder for new teachers to get tenure. “We are no longer handing out tenure like candy… This profession is not for everyone.”

Around 95 percent of teachers who apply for tenure get it. Before Deasy took over, the number was over 99 percent.

Ratliff also complimented Deasy for putting more decision items in front of the School Board, as he will do at the next Board meeting, saying it would “make the Board more accountable.”

Raliff’s position on Deasy has changed a number of times.

Back in February, at a candidates forum before the primary, Ratliff declined to evaluate Deasy’s job performance, saying, “I would need to know more.”

After coming in second place in the primary, she hardened her stance, telling LA School Report  that she would favor terminating Deasy’s contract, adding that he would be allowed to re-apply.

She later complained to this reporter that her remarks were taken “out of context,” saying that the only reason she had called for a new search for a district superintendent was because she had learned that Deasy was hired without any other candidates being considered. (This was the same reason Board Member Steve Zimmer abstained when the vote was taken in 2011).

Ratliff’s call for a new superintendent search spurred the LA Times editorial board to reconsider its endorsement of Ratliff, and invited her in for a second interview, where she abruptly reversed her position, saying “she thought he’d been a strong leader and that if she were in a position to decide on Deasy’s contract today, she would vote to renew it.”

The Times kept its endorsement; however, Ratliff has since stopped speaking to LA School Report. According to Teach Plus’ John Lee, initially she said that she wouldn’t come to the event when she found out that LA School Report would be at Thursday’s event. But she apparently changed her mind.

“I can’t say what he was thinking,” said Teach Plus chief Lee. “In a democratic society, you want to hear from candidates and have them questioned. If you’re running for LAUSD School Board you should be able to stand up on front of teachers.”

Shockingly, there are currently no public debates scheduled between the two District 6 School Board candidates.

Previous posts: Sanchez Unavailable for Candidate Forum; Daily News Addresses Ratliff Union Role; District 6 Candidate Commits to Support Deasy; District 6 Candidate Hardens Position on Deasy; Union Endorsements Unchanged for District 6

Monday, May 6 is the last day you can register to vote for the May 21 runoff. If you still haven’t registered, go here to register to vote online.

Click below for other deadlines for applying to vote by mail and to drop off a vote by mail application.

May 14, 2013 (Tuesday): The last day to apply by mail for a vote-by-mail ballot in the May runoff election.

May 20, 2013 (Monday): The last day to drop off a vote-by-mail ballot at the Los Angeles City Clerk’s election division office. (You can also fill out and mail in the vote-by-mail ballot application on the back of an official sample ballot.)

May 21, 2013 (Tuesday): Runoff election day. It’s also the last day to drop off a vote-by-mail ballot at any polling place by closing time at 8:00 p.m.

Image via TeachPlus

This afternoon’s Teach Plus candidates’ event may turn out to be the only live forum for District 6 contenders Monica Ratliff and Antonio Sanchez between now and the May 21 election day.

However, we’re told that Sanchez can’t make it, despite efforts to contact him and to reschedule the event to suit his schedule.

The event is being held at Sol Del Valle Community Center at Bethel Reformed Christian Church, and begins at 4:30.  Registration is required, but according to its website “The Teach Plus Network is open to all current district and charter school classroom teachers.”  LA School Report will be there.

Previous posts:  Forum Scheduled for District 6 Candidates; Little-Known Candidates Debut at District 6 Forum; District 6 Candidates Struggle to Differentiate Themselves; Little-Known Candidates Debut at District 6 Forum

Coalition flyer on behalf of D6 School Board candidate Antonio Sanchez

The Coalition for School Reform has already spent nearly $200,000 since the March 5th primary to support Antonio Sanchez‘s bid to replace Nury Martinez as District 6 Board Member.

With around $1 million left in the bank thanks to recent donations by former Mayor Richard Riordan ($50,000), New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg ($350,000), and philanthropist / art collector Eli Broad ($250,000), you can look for the Coalition to be spending a whole lot more as we enter the final three weeks of the campaign.

And yet, with the teachers union having endorsed both candidates, and therefore somewhat of a non-factor in the election, and both remaining candidates having committed to supporting LAUSD Superintendent John Deasy, it’s worth asking: why’s the Coalition still raising (and spending) so much money, and what are they doing with it?

“We take nothing for granted,” said Coalition spokesman Addisu Demissie, who added that much of the money would go to beefing up the Coalition’s field organization. “We learned in the primary that turnout is important, so we’re investing heavily so that we turn out voters in May.”

Indeed, despite its massive financial advantage, the Coalition has several reasons  to take every possible step to ensure that Sanchez is elected.

The reasons for the Coalition’s concerns are fairly straightforward:

The Coalition’s field operation for the March primary wasn’t powerful enough to secure a win for District 2 candidate Kate Anderson or a majority vote for Sanchez (which would have precluded the need for a runoff in District 6).

Sanchez’s runoff opponent, Monica Ratliff, has been endorsed by the LA Times and the LA Daily News.

Ratliff finished second in the primary with 34 percent, just 10 points behind the much better-funded Sanchez.

More importantly, she’s a teacher, which makes her popular with other teachers — many of whom vote and have friends and relatives who vote — and also a union representative for her school — which makes her popular with union members. Teachers were a main reason Bennett Kayser defeated Luis Sanchez in 2011.

A source close to Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who is the unofficial fundraiser-in-chief for the Coalition, said there was another reason to spend so much on Sanchez: to remind him what side his bread is buttered.

“Antonio Sanchez will know who got him elected,” said the source.

The Coalition does not want another Steve Zimmer.

Demissie denied that binding Sanchez to its reform agenda was a reason for the continued fundraising and spending: “The Coalition supports him because we think he’s the best candidate for LAUSD.”

The Coalition’s mailers have all been positive so far, touting his endorsements from Riordan, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, and a host of others.

Previous posts: Rumors Swirl Around Sanchez Staff Possibilities; District 6 Candidate Commits to Support Deasy; Undaunted, NYC Mayor Gives $350,000 to Reform Coalition; Coalition for School Reform Gets Big Donations

“It is sad that the Times has chosen to print rumors and innuendo, instead of doing the necessary research to either substantiate or disprove those rumors,” wrote UTLA President Warren Fletcher on the union’s website. “At no time has UTLA entered into any secret agreement with any candidate running for the L.A. School Board regarding staffing or any other subject.”

The three names dropped in the Times story  — all with strong ties to UTLA  — all denied making any deal, as did Sanchez, according to the Times.

But there’s another Sanchez chief of staff possibility that’s been floating around who has strong ties to the Mayor, LAUSD, and other school reform advocates.

The position of Board Member chief of staff is a fairly new one. Until 1975, Board Members were elected “at large,” meaning they didn’t even have separate districts, and shared from a pool of secretaries. In 1975, they were given their own districts and own secretaries. It wasn’t until the 1990s that Board Members started to get their own budgets and their own staffers.

Previous posts: District 6 Candidate Commits to Support Deasy; Forum Scheduled for District 6 Candidates; Union Funding One of Two Endorsed Candidates